Okay, but I think you are missing my point. It's not that I disagree with some of your conclusions; I actually agree with some of them. But you distort the facts and present them in a way that makes him sound much worse than they are, and always to prop Brady up. (I didn't mention brady in this thread, and this thread is not about brady. You're manufacturing that.)
(You talk about Brady in comparison to Manning, and vice versa, enough to know what your motives are). It's indicative of so many discussions/arguments/etc. that go on these days, where people feel the need to tear down one all-time great to make another look good. It happens with anyone compared to Michael Jordan in basketball, for example. And it always happens with Brady and Manning. By just about any measure, Brady and Manning are both among the top 5 QBs all-time, so picking nits about either really comes across as just that: picking nits. (I disagree with this, and i think a lot of other people do, too. I would not take manning over a lot of other hall of famers, and you continue to act like it is irrational to believe that)
(I didn't say it was irrational, but I am sure you can find plenty of people who agree with you, especially on the internet where many love to spout their crazy opinions and get away with it, but I think most knowledgeable football minds would agree that Peyton is a top 5 all-time QB; I believe he was the 3rd highest ranked QB in the top 100 the NFLN did last year). Some love to point out that Manning's only SB win was against Rex Grossman, but who cares? (Some do? I didnt. Youre setting up your own strawmen here, ironically in a post accusing me of doing the same thing).
(That's what I said "some," not "you.") A Super Bowl win is still a Super Bowl win. Does anyone nitpick Steve Young's career by belittling his one Super Bowl win because it came against Stan Humphries? Of course not. In the big picture, it really doesn't matter. (Again, that's why I didn't say it. But you sure took your time explaining why the thing I didn't say is wrong).
(I was speaking generally. I didn't say you said that about Young, for example. That was pretty obvious.)
Like I said earlier, when Manning's career is all said and done, let's assume he doesn't win. another ring, but notches a few more playoff wins...(why would we assume that? He hasnt won a playoff game since the 2009 season. He has a losing record in the playoffs, is on the back end of his career, and ravens players said he had lost the zip on his ball in the second half. He may be closer to done than you think)
(That is possible, but I was just speaking hypothetically.) his overall resume will look so ridiculously awesome (to whom? Lots of people in this thread who dont think it looks so ridiculously awesome)
(to most who have a clue about football) that few will care about his postseason W/L record. He will still be seen as a champion with countless records (people still talk about marinos playoff failures and many don't have him in their top 5. Manning winning a superbowl and having a losing playoff record doesn't light everybodys candle the same way, obviously)
(Marino never won a Super Bowl; Peyton did. I thought you were smart enough to understand the difference).
To give a few more examples of how your bias factored into your summation earlier:
You said Manning's pass to Wayne at the end of the Colts/Steelers game was ill-advised. Well, that is your opinion, not a fact. (Ok, going for a low percentage play at the end of a game he had already effectively lost twice wasn't his worst error in the game. The interception and the multiple sacks on the previous drive were worse. He had chance after chance, and failed to convert any of them, but that was a great decision. Better?)
(Your sarcasm aside, it's funny how you blame sacks on him. Manning is one of the least sacked QBs ever, but even he cannot avoid an all-out rush like that one the Steelers threw at him near the end of the game) What if he had completed that pass for a touchdown? Would the pass still have been ill-advised? Vanderjagt had a spectacular 2005 season, so why not take a shot at the win before tying the game with a FG? I doubt Manning knew Vanderjagt was gonna blow that kick as badly as he did.
(What, no witty retort?)
I won't defend Manning's performance in the snow in the 2003 AFCCG, but you neglected to point out the fact that the NFL changed the way penalties are called because of how blatant NE's defensive holding was in that game. (Yes, the colts complained that people were physical with their receivers. And the colts took full advantage of the don't touch us rule by setting a short lived record the next year. Your bias in saying that new england was blatantly holding is no less biased than what you're accusing me of, but the main point is that the nfl changed the rules after the game, not before it.)
(Oh, so it was okay to grab and hold all day? Got it. That aside, Peyton did play poorly in that game, but wasn't that his first game in the snow? Not making an excuse, but a QB who plays in a dome is normally gonna struggle more in such conditions more than a QB who is more used to them)
You glossed over the 2009 AFCCG by saying, "The following week he would beat the jets, 30 to 17, as his defense once again played well." You failed to point out how he brought them back from a 17-6 deficit by tearing the NFL's number 1 defense to shreds in the entire second half. But you sure took your sweet time talking about his failed drives at the end of the Super Bowl. (Yes, that's correct. I was addressing ssogs posts, in which he claimed that mannings d was the problem, and that manning didn't screw up repeatedly at the end of the game. It makes sense that I would call out places where mannings d held their opponents to 10 ppg in back to back weeks, and where manning screwed up at the end of the game. Im not writing a history of manning, im addressing somebody elses post)
(Manning's D did not hold their opponents to 10 PPG in back to back week; wording it that way implies they held both to 10. That is inaccurate. See, this is what I mean by you distorting the facts to make your argument seem stronger.)
This is what I mean. You gloss over his successes and go on and on and on about his failings. (Correct, because that was what I was posting about. I called out some of his successes, too, and also called out games he lost where he didn't make a big mistake at the end. That's what I should do in a post about how his playoff mistakes often lead to losses.)
(you do it in more threads than just this one, and you know it.) Your motives are more than obvious. (Your motive is to continue a years old debate we've had in the past, which I specifically called to an end. I didn't mention brady, yet you accuse me of posting about brady. you said you coud tear apart my post, but so far you found that I aattributed100 more yards in one game and 16 too few in another, and that I called a pass ill advised when I shouldn't have. It seems like you're the one with the axe to grind)
(Yes, the Brady vs Manning debate IS a years old debate, and you calling for an end to it doesn't mean we all have to drop to your knees and thank you for settling the argument and not talking about it anymore. If you called for an end to the debate, then why are you still talking about it? And if you are talking about the me vs. you debate, well, this is an internet forum, and no one is allowed to say who can and cannot reply to, except the mods, and since I never break the rules here, I don't see me going anywhere any time soon. I love a good spirited discussion or even debate about football, and I am pretty sure I am able to do that most of the time w/o resorting to silliness like certain posters here in the Shark Pool...not you, really. And it's sad because a very strong case can be made for Brady over Manning without tearing the latter down, (yes, it can, but im not doing that in this thread because this thread is not about brady, despite your attempts to make it so)
(No, it's about Manning, but since Brady is his natural rival, the comparisons are inevitable...you disagree??) but it's like you are so indignant that anyone would dare compare Peyton Manning to the great Tom Brady (who is doing that?)
(you often do), that every time it comes up(when did it come up?), you go on this long-winded rant that tears Manning down to the point where anyone who has never watched him play would think he was the second coming of Trent Dilfer.(no, thats just what you think you read. You have developed a preconceived notion of my posts, but I've posted about manning appropriately to the thread im in. In this thread, I responded early, ssog responded with well thought out stats about manning. They seemed wrong to me, so I looked it up and responded with a detailed post backing up my initial claim and refuting his stats. You're the one who came in here saying that you could always rip apart my posts, picking nits about which side of the 50 yard line manning was on when he drove the ball from the 42 to the 28, and saying I was talking about brady when I wasn't. You want to argue with the version of me who is saying the things you think im saying, because it would be easier for you to win that argument. But im not saying those things, and you keep doing this in thread after thread. I don't know why, I've asked you to stop, you stepped back in and did it again, I rose to the bait thinking you had some substance to provide, and then you give me this drivel. Again. You aren't posting with the moral superiority you seem to imagine for yourself. You should know that.)
(I post with moral superiority? That's a new one. I recall another poster or two telling you the last time we had a disagreement that you might want to think about how you post, since others all but agree with my assessment in how you come across, but you clearly did no such thing. Oddly, I rarely notice other posts of yours, so far all I know, you only post in threads about Brady, Manning or the Patriots, but it sure seems like you are just sitting there waiting to regurgitate your main talking points, which is that Tom Brady is the best ever, or that Peyton Manning is not that good. In this thread, it was the latter, not the former...THIS TIME...but it is only a matter of time before it becomes the former or the former AND the latter again. But whatever, at least you explain yourself when you say what you have to say, instead of the brainless hit and run posting tactics of too many posters in the SP these days. That is a compliment, BTW, intended to lighten the mood here. 
)
Says it all right there. But let's go back to this thing you do where you decide to use qb rating for some reason, and across all 60 minutes of the game. But people who watched the patriots beat the rams in 2001 would probably call bradys field goal drive to win the game a little more important than a field goal drive to start a game, just like people who watched denver lose a heartbreaker to the ravens would probably call the game ending interception more important than the one manning threw that bounced off deckers hands. The argument has never been that manning just crumbles for 60 minutes of playoff game. I've repeatedly said that he was having a good game on Saturday, too, but when it came down to overtime, it was totally predictable that manning would struggle. Look back at the game thread, people were joking about it long before it happened. we've seen it all before. You're welcome to show me how brady basically does the same thing, and how he has culpability in all six of his playoff losses including two superbowls. But you also witnessed him winning a shootout against the panthers in 2003, pulling out to a lead in 2004, leading a game winning drive to ice the game in 2001, leading game tying and game winning scoring drives against oakland inthe tuck rule game, and so on. And then youll go nutty talking about that game in particular, claiming he was helped by his kicker and a call nobody had heard of. And he was. Just like manning was helped by his defense and an overturned penalty in the steelers game, and he still kept blowing the many gifts he was handed. could manning have won that game, and brady have lost vs. Oakland? Sure. Over the long run, though - 20+ games spanning over a decade - manning has had opporunities, and brady has had opportunities, and one of them set the record for playoff wins, while the other set the record for playoff losses the same weekend.
